Many people want to protect and improve the natural environment. Which ONE of the following three actions is MOST useful for individuals to do in their daily lives if they want to help the environment? Why?
-Walking or bicycling instead of driving a car to work or school
-Recycling and reusing objects instead of throwing them in the trash (rubbish) can
-Buying locally grown, organic foods (grown without pesticides)
Nowadays, our society suffers from serious environmental problems: high concentration of carbon dioxide in the air gives a rise to global warming, threatening the life in the polar regions; factors directly pull polluted material into river or lakes, which poses a threat to life living in river or lakes; deforestation harms the whole ecosystem, making less room for animals that is reliant on the trees to reproduce to survive. Thus, as a part of the nature, human being should at least take some measures to improve natural environment. From my perspective, getting objects recycled and reused rather than throwing them into rubbish can directly is effective to protect our nature.
First, walking or riding to company won’t solve out the problem fundamentally. Granted, cars can emit carbon dioxide into air, which might increase the concentration of it in the air and thus result in global warming. However, cars just cover a little portion of carbon dioxide in the air. It is the factories which is located in the remote area that produce a large amount of carbon dioxide and release it into air. In this case, walking or riding does decrease the emission of carbon dioxide in the cities, but in the long run, we would still witness an elevation in the carbon dioxide in the air because never will factories stop discharging carbon dioxide.
Second, purchasing the locally grown or organic foods won’t be helpful. It’s admitted that if consumers purchase organic foods growing in local areas, farmers would tend to farm those foods without applying pesticides on them, which might decrease the side effects caused by pesticides. But there are still other areas where farmers still plant crops with pesticides. Under this circumstance, this solution can only protect the endemic environment rather than the whole environment.
Compared with the former two options, planning to recycle or reuse those thrown objects is viable and effective. As a matter of fact, sometimes those thrown rubbish can be especially detrimental for the ecosystem. To be more specific, items involving radiated materials can threaten the survival of wildlife. If those items are abandoned in the wild, it might result in the deaths of a large number of animals in the surrounding environment, including plants, animals, microorganisms and so on. What’s more, recycling and reusing not only won’t take people’s much time or labor but also might benefit their own life. For example, people can reuse plastic bag so that they do not have to buy a new one in the grocery store; people can recycle used electrical device to transform it into a brand new one so that they do not need to invest much on the updated one. In this way, our environment would not suffer from serious pollution and people’s daily life can be improved.
In conclusion, people should participate in the process of recycling and reusing used items, which might exert a far-reaching influence on improving environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 385, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... wild, it might result in the deaths of a large number of animals in the surrounding environment,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, still, thus, at least, for example, in conclusion, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 9.8082437276 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2505.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 488.0 407.700716846 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13319672131 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6956552467 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551229508197 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 773.1 618.680645161 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.391914045 48.9658058833 168% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.25 100.406767564 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 20.6045352989 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.65 5.45110844103 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.133407803723 0.236089414692 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368787534606 0.076458572812 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0384221177794 0.0737576698707 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0703381939829 0.150856017488 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0319229348112 0.0645574589148 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 86.8835125448 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 10.002688172 185% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.